Crossing Nineveh

Vatican Seeks Signs of Alien Life - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:24:00 +0000

Vatican Seeks Signs of Alien Life - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

Generals and Bureaucrates

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:44:00 +0000

For those of you following the drama of the MAKING of our movie TIGER'S HOPE, here's the latest. Truly, the making of it is more significant than the movie. But you have to read to the end. What follows is an email I sent out to the staff and crew earlier today. (sw)

--------

Dear Tiger's Hope Cast, Crew, Staff, and Volunteers:

Summary:
1. September Production is Canceled.
2. God’s Designs at Work
2. Feature Film Development Planned
3. This is Just the Beginning
4. Appreciation and Vision Dinner Coming
5. Surprise Ending

SEPTEMBER PRODUCTION IS CANCELED

Some of you know we've been dealing the last couple of weeks with an apparent crisis: The seed funding from the Diocese of Lansing for our production was suddenly rescinded after four months of enthusiastic support by the bishop and the Department of Life Justice Director, who wrote the initial grant and was the inspiration behind our attempt to save marriages and thousands of lives. But when the formal agreements were presented the bureaucrats appeared, the bishop was silenced, and the money yanked from the life justice director. I was informed two days ago by the head of Catholic Charities for the diocese, that "the diocese will not be joining" SWC Films in the production effort of Tiger's Hope, and neither will they make available the $55,000 grant awarded by Our Sunday Visitor Institute. Bummer… or so we thought.

GOD’S DESIGNS AT WORK

Events like this can be maddening to those of us who want to believe in the Church and its teachings. But the reality of bureaucratic problems within institutions is part of human nature. They existed at the time of Christ within the Synagogue, they exist today in all organizations, and for storytellers such problems always provide fodder for drama. As Philip Carrel, our production designer remarked, it’s ironic how “the bureaucracies set up to help people, often times obstruct the help from getting out.” In this case, interoffice politics seems to have prevented the creation of a project that could save thousands of lives and marriages. But there are plenty of reminders to the contrary. I go to confession at St. Bonaventure in Detroit. There, on Venerable Solanus Casey’s tomb are carved these words: “Blessed be God in all his designs. I sense that is what’s at work here.

MOTIVATIONS

My partner, Alex Davis, and I talked of the possibillity of losing the DOL’s financial support over a month ago and roughly figured that the two of us could fund the project alone, especially since we could count on the Michigan Film Incentives. But when the $55,000 actually went away we spent some time with cash flow estimates, and decided that taking on the financial risk endangered not only our families’ stability but the project’s quality. Now, as investors, with serious money involved (for us) we looked at our roles differently. First, rather than thinking as filmmakers and how we can make the movie better, we started to cut costs. And second, we kept putting on our marketing hats and trying to figure out how we could sell more DVDs to recover our investment. That kind of thinking was bound to hurt the project’s quality and clarity of message. Bad.

FEATURE FILM DEVELOPMENT PLANNED

Then it occurred to us that when I wrote the treatment and script for TIGER'S HOPE, which sold the bishop and others on doing the drama instead of the documentary, I was careful to pull my dramatic punches and attempted to please the bishop and Christian cable channels like EWTN and TBN. That is why, if you've read the script, Stacey TELLS us about in vitro and all the dangers, but we never SEE or experience in vitro. Movies are about SHOWING and not TELLING. Stacey’s lines were more appropriate to a play where about all a director has to work with are words. A second thing that always bugged me was Tiger was the only character that had a developed arc. We never investigated Jake, her husband, and in procreative practices the husband is suppose to be an equal partner in all this. Hello! Finally, and third, is something I write and lecture about but in Tiger's Hope was nearly absence—an antagonist that seemed larger and more powerful than the protagonist. Great stories have great antagonists that drive the protagonist to change in ways they would never have done otherwise. That failing I dismissed because I didn't want to reveal the underbelly of the church and it's internal dissidents, nor did I have the time in the shorter production planned to develop such a character.

Then the bishop went away, literally (sounds like a plot point). We lamented his disappearance at first, but then our eyes began to open. WE DIDN'T HAVE TO APPEASE THE BISHOP, or the diocesan bureaucrats, or the censors at Christian networks. We could tell a REAL story, and include what we needed to communicate the full drama of the subject. THAT WAS LIBERATING!

Coupled with that was some dramatic elements to the longer story that we were introduced to by the real life experiences of a Catholic couple who recently went through in vitro with their priest’s blessing. When I first heard their tale I literally came out of my seat in shock, and wanted to totally rewrite Tigers Hope, but realized I'd need a feature length project to tell the story properly.

In another script I analyzed for someone in Hollywood the Chinese concept of Wei Ji was explained. Together the figures Wei and Ji mean "Crisis". The Wei equates with "danger" but the "Ji" equates with opportunity. That's similar to the Christian teaching that every bad thing that enters our life has with it a bigger grace. Romans 8:28 says "All things work together for good to those that are called according to His purpose."

Or, in the words of our project Chaplin Fr. Mike: FEATURE LENGTH Movie. YEAH ! AMEN! ALLELUIA! Thanks be to God going Mainstream YES!

THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING

Now a lot of very good work has been done on this project to date, and we do not intend to lose it. The work we've all done has not been wasted, but will all contribute to the next phrase… although for now we will take a pause to regroup and refocus.... even as the story development process has already begun. So, please save your work, and please send me a back-up copy. We will continue, I hope, with the music production as that is almost done, and it’s on-going life can be an inspiration for where we go next.

STUDY GUIDES

One member of the team mentioned the advantages of also having a study guide that would accompany the movie, so groups could further study the Bible and Church moral teaching related to marriage. That was always the intent, and it still is. Such guides give the entire film effort on-going meaning and purpose, as well as act as a cross marketing tool. We have study guides for a number of our other best selling DVDs; they are downloaded for free off our websites in the thousands.

APPRECIATION AND VISION DINNER COMING

Now, we haven't set a date, but we want to invite you and your significant other to a banquet at Mama Mia's in Walled Lake where we will treat you to their great food, and let the producer's of Tiger's Hope share with you our appreciation for all of your work, and our excitement and vision for where we're going next on this journey And maybe we can persuade Angela Maiz (Tiger), Al Jacquez (Jake), and songwriters Janet Pound, and James Stonehouse to share with us the great songs they've created, which I still hope to record in the next couple weeks.

No date for the dinner is set yet, but stay tuned.

Alex Davis sends this along from St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians (chapter 6 verses 11-20 Contemporary English Version): Let the mighty strength of the Lord make you strong. Put on all armor that God gives, so you defend yourself against the devil's tricks. We are not fighting against humans. We are fighting against forces and authorities and against rulers of darkness and powers in the spiritual world. So put on all the arms that God gives. Then when that evil day comes, you will be able to defend yourself. And when the battle is over, you will be standing firm.

Stan
Stanley D. Williams, PhD.
Executive Producer - Director
Office 248-344-4423

P.S. This just in, moments after this was posted: The Director of Life Justice has been fired.

With So Many Klutzes..., Why Be Catholic?

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 03:00:00 +0000

What follows is a letter a friend of mine wrote to a guy named Bob. I contributed to it, but it is clearly, Michael King's.

Dear Bob,

This is a personal letter to you and to explain how much I really do understand your situation. Roman Catholics are some of the worst Christians imaginable. They do not read their Bibles. They do not evangelize. Some do not care much for their fellow man and so it goes on and on and on. I do not think it is all their fault as they are badly instructed as to what is really important and true. I am somewhat ashamed of them!! Now you may ask and rightly so why on earth be a Catholic amongst such a shameful bunch? Catholics divorce, abort, and use condoms and birth control just like the heathen and their Protestant counterparts. The Mass service, as celebrated by some priests, is desperately boring and misunderstood. The homilies are often irrelevant and the people you meet in Church are mostly uninterested in you and quite unfriendly. I am talking generally. There are exceptions and thank God for them. But they are only exceptions.

I am a devout and died in the wool Catholic for one reason only. Get this! Just One reason only. Why???????? Because it is TRUE!!!!!! That is the only reason. It is still the Church that Jesus is guiding down through the centuries; it must be because in spite of all the personal sins and mistakes of some of it's leaders, it's still here? How could that be except by the miraculous protection of God Himself?! And, amazingly, its official teachings about the faith have NEVER changed, nor have they bowed to secularism, or popularism, or moral relativism, or deconstructionism as has every other Christian Church in those doctrines that are distinct from Catholicism. Even the Greeks and Orthodox are inconsistent and have given in on issues like birth control. Everything the Catholic Church teaches can be traced back to the Apostles without contamination.

Many of my best friends are Protestants and Not Catholics. Yes, I do have a few very very good Catholic ones that can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I do know a handful of priests that I can admire and I am thankful for them. This picture that I have painted reminds me of the well known account in the Old Testament of Elijah and the Prophets of Baal. Do you remember how much water Elijah insisted be poured over the sacrifice to make sure it would not burn? Then Whoooooosh!!!! The fire came down and consumed the water, the sacrifice, and even the altar on which it was put. That is the Catholic Church for you, and all that water on the sacrifice is its shameful side. Jesus knew well the heart of man so He devised a Church which would not rely on man -- any man -- for survival. We are all gone astray, there is none good no not one. Jesus knew that so He devised a fool proof Church that would last whether there were good people, bad people, or a whole bunch of indifferent people.

Please, I am going to send this not only to you but to many as it has to be said. Bob, I love and I would love you even if you were a Muslim or a Jehovah Witness or a Mormon or an Atheist.

Michael Jaffray King

BELIEVE IN A DREAM

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 04:40:00 +0000

It's time to tell this story, which some have heard. But, as of Friday the song writing team of composer James Stonehouse and lyricist Janet Pound came aboard the project to write the four songs for Tiger and Jake in our movie TIGER'S HOPE.

This is one of those stories that helped to confirm that while my name may be followed as "producer" there is more going on here than I can explain. A month or so ago I broke down and at the suggestion of other producer friends, I called a Casting Director, Janet Pound, of Pound-Mooney Casting. Janet and her partner, Kathy Mooney have cast a number of the major movies that have come through Michigan, and they just picked up 3 more, including the huge project RED DAWN. Here's an interview with them about auditions that some may find interesting. It appeared on BACKSTAGE. (Janet is on the left, Kathy right.)

I was looking for a female lead, someone who could take control of a difficult role, could sing, and preferably had dark hair. Janet asked if I would consider a soprano, and I demurred, thinking I needed a mezzo or alto, someone with some soulish guts to her voice. Janet asked again and wanted to send along an mp3 of something sung by an ex-Off Broadway actress-dancer-singer Angela Maiz who had "retired" to Michigan to have kids (Angela had just birthed number four.) The song had been written and recorded two years earlier as part of CAR STARS, a tribute to the automobile industry here in Michigan. "Sure, send it along," I said, not expecting much.

The first track of the mp3 Janet sent had been compressed several times, and with my loss of some high frequencies in my hearing, I couldn't understand a word. But as I listened to the music and voice I started to tear up. What's going on here, I wondered? What was clear was that the melody and style was close if not dead on to the mood of the very important opening song to the movie. (In those first montage scenes we're introduced to the life of an entertainer who is struggling with something sad in her life. Halfway through the song we join her on stage at her dinner club where she sings for an appreciative audience. But at song's end she breaks down in tears and heads for her dressing room. There, on her husband-manager's chest she laments her infertility.) I asked for the lyrics. They came. Click on the song title below to listen as you follow the words. The song will open in a second window or tab, allowing you to come back to this one to read the words as Angela (TIGER) sings. That's her above from her audition videotape.

BELIEVE IN A DREAM

WHEN ARE YOU TOO OLD TO BELIEVE IN A DREAM
AND WHEN DO YOU LET GO OF THE BALLOON IN THE AIR
WHEN ALL OF THE STEPS ON THE LADDER RUNG
WON’T TAKE YOU ANYWHERE

WHEN THE GLEAM IN YOUR EYES
CAN NO LONGER BE SEEN
AND WHEN THE MOON HOLDS NO MYSTERY
AND THE LAUGH OF A CHILD
DOESN’T MAKE YOUR HEART SING

REFRAIN: DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN YOU LET YOUR DREAM GO
THE DAY, THE TIME, THE HOUR
OR DOES IT SLOWLY FADE AWAY LIKE THE PETALS
ON A FLOWER.
DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN?

WHEN DID YOU STOP WISHING ON STARS
AND CATCH FIRE FLIES AND PUT THEM IN JARS
WHEN THE COIN IN THE FOUNTAIN, AND DANDELION WISHES
ALL LOST THEIR ALLURE

WHEN THERE ARE NO MORE SONGS TO SING
OR THE HOPE OF A WINTER TURNING TO SPRING
AND THE DREAM THAT YOU HAD IS SLIPPING AWAY
HOLD ON

DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN YOU LET YOUR DREAM GO
THE DAY, THE TIME, THE HOUR
OR DOES IT SLOWLY FADE AWAY LIKE THE PETALS ON A FLOWER.

REFRAIN:

WHENEVER YOU CLAP AND CAUSE THE APPLAUSE
THE DREAM NEVER DIES, IT JUST PASSES ON
YOU’RE NEVER TO OLD TO BELIEVE IN A DREAM,
IF YOU CAN, OH, IF YOU CAN
DREAM IT FOR ANOTHER.

Now, with the words, I was mesmerized. But I had a small problem. I had just convinced Fr. Eduard Perrone, the musical genius and composer who is also the pastor at Assumption Grotto Catholic Church in Detroit, to write the songs for Tiger's Hope. Fr. Perrone's agreement to be involved inspired me, and excited others that knew him. But he was waiting for me to sketch out some rough words to the four songs, to give him a sense of where the songs should go. I had not had time to do that.

Now, I was faced with telling Fr. Perrone about this song (from another songwriter/composer team) -- that had me in tears as I envisioned the first seven scenes of the movie with this music playing in the background. The mood and sentiment was perfect. Reticent, I sent the lyrics and mp3 to Fr. Perrone, and told him the story of how it came to me. I asked him what he thought of it. He wrote back:

I listened carefully to the song. It seemed to have that blend of misty melancholy and hopeful yearning: the combined effect of the lyrics and the subtly nostalgic music. I do not think I could better this in any way and you ought to allow your instincts about the rightness of this piece for TH to direct its inclusion in it. --- If it's my blessing on this that you seek, you have it in good measure--not only for the use of this song but for the entire project which has the potential of enriching many lives and of averting a tragic end to some difficult but solvable marital difficulties.

Thus, songwriters Janet Pound, lyricist (my Casting Director) and her friend, James Stonehouse, composer, entered the picture. It took a couple meetings and several emails later, and James sending yet another tune he had written for another of the movie's montages, to convince me that these two were cut out perfectly for Tiger's Hope. We agreed last week on the money, and they're eager to get the work done, so we can record the songs at maestro Terry Herald's studio next month.

God, What Would You Do Without Me?

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:34:00 +0000

I'm a tad frustrated with bureaucracy of the Catholic Church. "Tad" may be an understatement. But the Church is a reflection of God Almighty. So, my frustration is with God, actually.

While explaining my latest frustration, to my loveliness (Pam, my wife) I let out with a joking exclamation, throwing my hands into the air: "God!? What would you do without me?"

We laughed.

Then, I thought that my whining would be a great title of a book or a blog. Imagine all the funny, self-deprecating things you would write about... even in the words of historical figures. We could start with creation, and why did it take billions of years to create the universe? Bureaucracy no doubt. It's tough getting billions upon billions of electrons lined up to make a clump of coal, let alone a fusion-fired star. Probably harder than herding cats.

Then Pam said, "How about 'ARROGANCE IN UNIFORM'. That's good. Finally she said to me, as I stood in the hall starring at the floor thinking, just outside the bathroom where she was curling her hair -- "Don't calm down, get going!"

So, I came in here to write this.

What a Way to Go!

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:27:00 +0000

Germaine, in her role as Mother Teresa in a skit at Fr. Perrone's 30th Anniversary celebration from Diane M. Korzeniewski's Grotto website. (Not used with permission, but I think Diane won't mind.)

If you're going to die in a car accident, Germaine shows us how. She was the elderly, diligent, hardworking, and street smart housekeeper for Fr. Perrone at the Assumption Grotto rectory. At the end of her day of ministry to a house full of priests and staff, she was crossing Gratiot to catch a bus. She was struck by a speeding car that one witness pegged at 90 mph. She unconscious instantly. Probably felt no pain. Witnesses say she was knocked out of her tennis shoes. As PROVIDENCE would have it, at that very instant, Fr. Perrone, Fr. Bustamonte, and Fr. White were entering a car (to go to the wake for the mother of Grotto blogger Diane M. Korzeniewski) in the rectory parking lot a few dozen feet away. Someone came to them yelling that there at been an accident and they were needed. They ran to the street and found the lady that they loved so much, near death, unconscious, her heart still beating. While Fr. Bustamonte held the oil, Fr. Perrone, in shock, administered Germaine her last rites, and some other prayers of forgiveness that one parishioner said guaranteed her entrance to the pearly gates. Now, I know these three holy priests, and I gotta tell you: I cannot imagine a better way to go, if you're going to go in an accident. Imagine, your life is full -- being the housekeeper of the Church of the living God -- you're struck by something, you don't know what, no pain, no suffering, and instantly 3 priests are kneeling over you in the street ensuring your eternal reward. What a way to go! You can pray for Germaine, but I KNOW Germaine is praying for us and the continual, effectual, ministry of those priests, who are still in shock.

Here is post from Diane about Germaine.

COMPLETION FUNDING NEEDED

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:15:00 +0000

COMPLETION FUNDING NEEDED
for Catholic Pro-Life Television Movie

Dear Friends,

WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW to complete the funding of this project and give it the "Green Light." It is a UNIQUE Pro-Life television drama planned for production very soon. We have accounted for 60% of the $250K budget, which leaves us with only $100K. Can you or someone you know meet that (tax deductible) difference by the end of June? If so, please call now, or visit our Contribution Page, so we can properly plan production.

Call either Rory Hoipkemier, Life Justice-Catholic Charities, Diocese of Lansing at 517-342-1469. or myself, Stan Williams, SWC Films at 248-344-4423 Ext. 5. Or visit the Contribution Page at TigersHope.com

Inspired by a suggestion from Professor & Pro-Life Advocate Janet Smith, the Diocese of Lansing (under Bishop Earl Boyea's guidance) submitted and received from Our Sunday Visitor a grant to do a video on the physical and moral dangers of IN VITRO fertilization. Quickly we realized that to change society's mind-set a simple documentary was only going to be watched by the "choir." So, we took the high road and have been developing a 30 min drama with original music and top notch actors.

A FEW EARLY ENDORSEMENTS:

"The script is quite moving and sensitive... cannot wait to see it on film."
(Dr. Thomas Hilgers, The Pope Paul VI Institute)

"A powerful drama portraying the Godly truth of the sacredness of human life from its very beginnings." (Dr. Ray Guarendi)

"Tiger's Hope is profoundly moving and captivating drama of life and love."
(Fr. Mike Lubinsky, Augusta, GA.)

Others have called the script: "A BEAUTIFUL STORY" -- "EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING" and "I COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN."

You can read all about the project at TIGERSHOPE.COM, and even download and read the script. (UN = tiger, PW = naturallaw)

Targeted at Catholics and other Christians the project will reveal the full truth of natural law and the Church's teaching about IVF. The DVD will be captioned, subtitled in different languages, and distributed to high schools, seminaries, and pro-life organizations around the world.

Your help is needed this month to fund this project and also let others know about it by forwarding this email.

As Catholics, we are called to learn our faith and to be ready to share it with everyone. This film presents an important message that needs to be shared.

THANK YOU.
Stanley D. Williams, Ph.D.
Co-Executive Producer, Writer, & Director
SWC Films

Presentation of Jesus in the Temple Luke 2:22ff

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:53:00 +0000

An Ignatian Repetition.

JERUSALEM, ABOUT 2000 YEARS AGO. SUNRISE.

Hundreds of pilgrims mill around the marble columns of the Temple.

An OLD MAN rounds a pillar and nearly tumbles over an OLD WOMAN resting on the ground.

OLD MAN (M:) (with an uncanny knack for English vernacular)
Good Grief! Why don't you go home for a change?

OLD WOMAN (W:) (looking up and wondering if the subtitles are working)
For the same reason you come everyday to clean the floor with those oversized robes. Who do you think you are, a priest?

M: They keep my feet warm.

W: Well you might get some thicker sandels, or try wearing socks.

M: Socks? What are...

W: (interrupting) In time, in time. Don't push it.

M: You just can't let a guy go in peace, can you?

W: Well, if you weren't so politically correct I'd get out from under your misogynistic feet.

M: Mis-ongen... what?

W: All you think about is being Jewish!

M: What's wrong with that?

W: Some of us aren't Jewish?

M: You're not, Jewish? But you've been here for as long as I've been coming to Temple. You never leave the place, what'd...

W: I didn't say I wasn't Jewish, but do you think all these pilgrims that you're cleaning up after are Jews? Look at that guy over there with the pug face. No nose at all. Where do suppose he's from? And the family... there, by on the steps to the portico. The guy's at least in his 4th decade and still no hair. Why are they here?

M: I... I.... guess. I don't know!

W: Of course you don't. That's because you're just too Jewish for your own good. They're here for the same reason you and I suffer from Temple addiction. Today could be the day. They don't want to miss it either. They come in here to pray, and experience the presence of God.

M: But how could they... they're.... goya -- they are all that is not of Israel.

W: Well, like I've been saying...and even though you're tripping over them, and you're picking up their trash day after day, you don't get it. He's coming for them, too.

M: I still don't believe it. Why would God care about the gentiles and their filthy habits. Look here's another hamburger wrapper just lying on the ground. (The Old Man stabs it with a pointed stick, and then slides it into a trash bag slung over his shoulder. )

W: That was mine.

M: Sun's finally up.

W: He's coming as a light to them, too. See how the sun warms their feet as well as your own?

The Old Man looks around the temple as the early morning sun stirs the pilgrims who have spent the night on the ground. It is warm. It is light. And it falls upon the just and the unjust, the Jews and the Gentiles alike.

M: I just don't believe it.

W: It's not up to you.

As his eyes drift across the crowd toward the entrance steps his eyes notice that several people are moving toward a couple and a young child that have just entered. The sun cuts through the columns like a stage's follow spot and lands on the mother and small child she carries. The man has a worn cloth bag of belongings over his shoulder and a couple of birds wrapped in a net. He seem surprised at how people are looking at them, their eyes following every step. But the young mother smiles to herself, eyes cast down, at the child's face still hidden in the wrap.

W: What is it?

The Old Man is silent. He just gazes at the family as they come up the steps, through the crowd, toward where and the his old lady friend have been bickering and debating future history.

M: They're coming over here.

The woman gets up, slowly, in an aged way, and looks toward the bustle.

She squints in the bright light that now encircles the family... yes, like a halo, as corny as that may sound.

W: That's her. They've been talking about her for weeks now. A young girl, a virgin even, who had a baby in the middle of the night. Her husband's much older. Yes, I'm sure. Those people near them stirring? Those are families from Bethlehem, see the blue dye of their rucksacks. They match the mother's. That's her, Simeon.

Simeon just stares. He can't help but notice that others, the Gentiles that have come to the Temple, not as worshipers, but messy tourists that make his job cleaning up the place more difficult, are being drawn to the young family, who are now almost upon them.

SIMEON: Anna, what should I do?

ANNA: I've always said you pray out loud better than the high priest. Go for it.

Simeon steps forward, into the path of the young mother. The woman's husband is a little more agile and intervenes with his walking stick to protect the mother and her child. But the Simeon's eyes are on the woman, and then the baby. And the mother, after glancing into Simeon's eyes recognizes something special. She looks up at her husband and smiles, who drops his stick.

Then, almost as if it was for thousands of years, she unwraps the child, and hands him to the Simeon's waiting embrace. Anna stands nearby, knowing what is about to happen; she knows this old coot. He may be prejudice against the Gentiles, but he loves God more than most. What a great priest he would have made. But, now... this moment, may make up for some of that.

Simeon takes the child, almost kneels in the process, but then thinks again, and instead holds the child slightly aloft, turns toward the sun, and a throng of people that have gathered. The pug faced man, and the hairless man and his family are standing right in front of him... and all eyes are on the child that Simeon holds so firmly but reverently aloft.

SIMEON: (every word counts as he unblinkingly prays):

Now, Master, you may let your servant go in peace, according to your word. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you prepared...

He glances at the many faces from many nations.

...which you have prepared in the sight of all the peoples, a light...

Then he catches Anna's eyes, as the diminutive old woman gazes up at the child.

...a light for revelation to the Gentiles...

Anna smiles.

...and glory for your people Israel.

There is a hush over the gathering as Simeon so carefully gives the baby back to his mother, an astonished look on her face and her husband's.

SIMEON (to the mother):

Behold, this child is destined for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be contradicted. And you yourself a sword will pierce so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.

And he backs away.

The old woman thinks to herself: Not bad. Yes, he wold have made a great priest, listening to confessions, atoning for sins. But then, someone has to pick up the garbage.

"Imprimatur" Granted for New Book

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:10:00 +0000

We are thrilled to announce that the book we've been working on for two years, WHAT CATHOLICS REALLY BELIEVE, has just received Detroit Archbishop Vigneron's Approval for Publication. This is a big deal.

The terms "Nihil Obstat" and "Imprimatur" is old school...at least the words are, according to a 2004 USCCB guideline. The fancy new phrase used by American bishops is now: "Permission to Publish." Makes sense, at least I understand what it means. But I wanted to acknowldge the work of Dr. Robert Fastiggi, who acted as censor on the project.

WHAT CATHOLICS REALLY BELIEVE will be a new book based on the video series of the same name featuring Dr. Ray Guarendi, Fr. Kevin Fete, with an answer guide written by David Armstrong. Yours truly was the book's editor, question writer, and manager. Here's a picture of what the cover will look like.

When will it be out? Well, that depends when we can get all the pictures in place and finalize the layout. We had wanted to get it to printing this summer so it would be ready for RCIA this fall, but we're way behind that schedule right now, unless I'm able to spend the next 30 days finishing the layout. But our movie project, Tiger's Hope, is on the front burner, so the book's probably going to be delayed.

Several years ago the diocese couldn't give us an Imprimatur for the video series (not according to Canon Law), so we worked on the book... so, essentially both are now doctrinally approved. Same censor, too. Thanks. Dr. Fastiggi.

The letter reads:

RESCRIPT

In accord with canon 827.3 of the Code of Canon Law, I, the Most Reverend Allen H. Vigneron, Archbishop of Detroit, hereby grant my approval to publish the book, WHAT CATHOLICS REALLY BELIEVE, Dispelling the Misrepresentations and Misunderstandings of Historic Christianity with Scripture and Tradition, by Ray Guarendi, Ph.D., Reverend Kevin Fete, with Answer guide by David Armstrong."

Notice of this rescript is to be included in the book, as follows:

Ecclesiastical approval for publiation was granted by The Most Reverend Allen H. Vigneron, Archbishop of Detroit, May 20, 2009, in accord with cannon 827.3 of the Code of Canon Law.

Given in Detroit, Michigan, on the Feast of St. Bernadine of Siena, this twentieth day of May, in the year ofour Lord, two thousand. nine.

Signed:
The Most Reverend Allen H. Vigneron
Archbishop of Detroit.

Stormy Waters and Hope

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sun, 31 May 2009 11:54:00 +0000

Family Ties & the author return to the Detroit River
(Photo by world adventurer and photographer, Charlie Scott)

Pam was attending a baby shower, and my eye balls were in need of a distant horizon, instead of the computer screen that even now is but 14-inches away. So, I went sailing.

There is not a better place to feel energized or contemplate God's nature and power than on a sailboat. So, I packed up the books and diary I use for my Ignatian Spiritual Exercises, made sure I had my iPhone Bible with me, dropped off Nineveh's Crossing's orders at the Post Office, stopped by Subway (it takes a while to get to the boat)... and an hour later was pulling out of the dock.

My life as a film producer, distributor, and writer is often filled with anxious moments... mostly centered around money to buy inventory, or pay for a number of projects we're developing. And sometimes those moments stretch into days. It's a constant challenge to keep spiritually focused on God's plans and not those that I devise without God. There's the rub, making sure the day's challenges are put there at the behest of God, and not the foolishness of Stan. Telling the difference is my biggest beef with God.

Lately, working on script, cast, and fund raising for Tiger's Hope, the decisions about how to spend time and money are often difficult to make, especially since both time and money have severe limits. There's never enough of either, it seems ... in the service of God. (my words, not God's)

Two days ago I was doing what all producer's do -- planning. Planning a film project is a little like budget forecasting in a recession. It seems useless, because what you plan never happens the way you thought it would. It generates a lot of chuckles and a few groans along the way. The question is always there: "What shall I do?"

That question was particularly haunting two days ago when my spiritual exercises took me to Jeremiah 29:11 and these words:

For I know well the plans I have in mind for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare not for woe! Plans to give you a future full of hope.

That fits. But now I have to be sure "God's" plans are mine. Not easy.

That day the second part of my spiritual exercises took me to reflecting on the appearance of the Magi at the Nativity. I laughed out loud at the juxtaposition of Jeremiah's words ringing in my ears and putting myself in Joseph's sandals just before the Magi appear. Here's a guy that has to be wondering what "the plan" is. He's no doubt got a few of his own churning around in his head. He's got this "wife" and "baby" to care for, and he knows they are both a "little bit" special, and what's he got to offer them? Not much. The last time he tried to pawn his wood plain the broker laughed and pointed at his overstocked shelf of other pawned wood plains.

And then OUT OF THE WOODWORK (a phrase Deacon Bob uses on me when he thinks my ideas just may not be part of God's plan) come these three lost "kings" from the East with stars in their eyes, bearing gifts, looking for the King of the Jews. Uh-huh! These guys are seriously lost, Joseph thinks...wonder if they could use a wood plain?

But you know the story, and Joseph, 2,000+ plus years later in heaven is still scratching his head. There's no way he could have planned that. (plained that?) Most of us hope "one" sugar daddy will show up to help us with the latest "Project from God." But THREE?! They just drop in from left field, er.... they just pop OUT OF THE WOODWORK. (Sorry, Deacon, can't help but rub it in.)

Joseph had to have hope after that... at least until after Herod's soldiers started wiping the blood of babies off their swords.

So, I go sailing. Alone. the waters are rough, very rough. The wind is hollowing out of the West at 25-30 knots. I sail out of the Detroit River against the current, which is not something you can normally do. On Lake St. Clair there are gusts to 40, 50, and one time they hit 61 knots. What have I gotten myself into, alone, with a big boat, and just me? So, I find a moment of relative calm, turn on the iPhone Bible and access the scripture I'm suppose to be mediating on. It's Isaiah 43:1-7, which in part reads

When you pass through the water, I will be with you; in the rivers you shall not drown.

Okay, God, I get it, but let's get back to the dock so I can blog this.

NATURAL LAW DRAMATIZED ON NATIONAL TV

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Thu, 28 May 2009 01:17:00 +0000

Something quite amazing is playing out before us on national television that shows the wisdom of Catholic teaching such as Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life.) In spite of all the horrific pro-death, anti-life, anti-family decisions made by our politicians, one fact remains: In the end, you can’t buck natural law. Or, in the words of another common adage from years gone by, “You can’t fool mother nature.”

But, boy, the drama of watching it play out on reality TV is both heart rending and amazing. Since becoming Catholic I’ve been enamored with the phenomenon of large families, especially Catholic families. As a filmmaker I wanted to do a documentary on a couple of them, but never got together the resources. Lucky for me, others were able to mount projects (although not Catholic), and we’ve been enjoying The Learning Channel’s productions of The Duggars (18 Kids and Counting), and The Gosslins (John & Kate Plus 8).

Both families have Christian roots. The Duggars have a more explicit Christian presence (www.duggarfamily.com), but on the Gosslin’s show Scripture verses can be seen taped to the end of John and Kate’s kitchen cabinets, and John has been seen wearing T-shirts with Scripture references on them.

But early on I saw a huge difference in these families, and recently the difference has become a news item on just about every news show and website. I’m speaking about the breakdown of John and Kate’s marriage, and the very public playing out of the conflict on national television. The news media would have you believe the problem is the stress of success by having a hit show to which ten million tune in weekly. And indeed that is probably a contributor. But I noticed something early on. Did you? There has always been a romantic detachment in John and Kate’s relationship. They look at each other as if there was no romantic relationship between them whatsoever. They are like romance zombies… the romantic walking dead. You could never tell by their non-verbal or interactions that these two people love each other as husband and wife. They could be complete strangers thrown together in a reality show where they’re trying to get along, but it’s a strain. I have always felt sorry for them because of that.

But, if you watch the Duggars, the difference is startling. Now, the Duggars don’t have 8 kids to deal with, they have 18. Let’s say that again: THEY HAVE EIGHTEEN!!! And have you ever noticed the nonverbal between Jim Bob and Michelle? It’s like “love at first sight.” When Jim Bob talks and Michelle’s within sight her eyes are on him as if he was the most wonderful man in the world. She is totally in love with this guy. And when she talks, Jim Bob watches her affectionately. His eyes never wander. The love and respect is palatable, even through the silly flat TV screen.

Why the difference? Did you ever wonder? Well, Paul VI could have told you, as well as John Paul II, and a few others. And while I don’t want to be labeled a judge of people, I can’t help but take note of one particularly public difference between the sexuality of these two couples and Catholic teaching about natural law.

In the case of John and Kate Gosslin, all eight of their babies were conceived via intrauterine insemination, which involved implantation of Jon's sperm via a catheter. Kate compares the procedure with in vitro fertilization, (but) "there are no eggs removed or put back, as with IVF." Here's a link to her interview about that: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/jon-and-kate-plus-8.htm/printable

Compare that to the Duggars. While I’ve found no specific reference to how their children were conceived, (and there wouldn’t be if they were natural) their frank discussion of how they came to give up the contraceptive pill and let God have his total will with their lives and how many children they would have, explains that the Duggars, while not Catholic, have come to understand and apply natural law for all their pregnancies. Here's a link to their website's FAQ where they discuss how God told them to give up the contraceptive pill. http://www.duggarfamily.com/faq.html

Through these two high-profile network reality shows we see the impact that natural vs. non-natural fertilization methods have. Catholic teaching is founded on natural law. When we follow what is natural, husbands and wives are drawn close together in a natural and supportive love. In the sexuality of marriage, when we reject what is natural we enter the danger zone as we separate the unitive and procreative nature of marriage. Paul VI writes “By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its ordination towards man’s most high calling to parenthood.” (Humanae Vitae, 12)

This all become very real for me recently as I’m in the midst of producing a pro life Catholic television drama on in vitro versus natural fertilization. The project is titled TIGER’S HOPE, a co-production of the Diocese of Lansing and my production company, SWC Films, with seed funding from Our Sunday Visitor. We hope to shoot it this fall in Michigan.

Through the power of story, this short movie will give an accurate picture of the state of both in vitro technology with its health hazards, its low probability of success, and its health effects on children and mothers. All that will be dramatically contrasted with natural methods that have no side effects, almost no cost, and a success rate that is 300-400% greater than in vitro. The cultural ramifications of separating the conception of children from the martial act will also be revealed in light of the Church's teachings on marriage and the dignity of each human being.

The differences between The Duggars and The Gosllins dramatically underscore the need for a clearer understanding of natural law, and why Church teachings are so vital for healthy and happy marriages. TIGER'S HOPE is designed to reach television audiences world wide with that message in a dramatic, movie format.

If you’d like to be involved in this unique international film project, or know someone who would, visit the project website at www.TigersHope.com. We have half the funding we need. Will you help us and make a contribution?

P.S. I can't help but also notice the differences between the position of the father in the two pictures used to illustrate this article. I did not pick these pictures with this in mind. It just "happened." (Right!) Both are pictures of the entire family around the dinning room table. Notice how John is standing in the background, a cap on his head (as if hiding or ready to bolt for the door), while Kate, in charge, is involved with the kids around the Gosslin table. Then notice how Jim Bob sits at the head of the Duggar table (in charge, and not going anywhere) while Michelle sits (partially hidden) at his side. Telling. Pay attention folks.

The Kingdom of Christ - Contemplation

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:32:00 +0000

Here is my reflection on The Kingdom of Christ.... it's a repetition.

God, I beg you for your grace that all my thoughts and actions be directed toward the advancement of your Kingdom. I offer up all my time, money, service, suffering, spirit to the advancement of Christianity both here and there with you.... In so doing I ask that I will act against sensuality and carnality and worldly love of things.

So, here I am in the Lord's presence as I work at my various tasks throughout the day. He labors immediately beside me. I can reach out and touch Him, or look at what he is doing (as if on his desktop)... a co-worker. We are in a large tiled and marble columned round room like a rotunda. Around the perimeter are many Biblical and other unknown saints standing behind the great ancestors of mine, who stand in front of the heavenly throng. I can look around at the crowd of witnesses watching me and the Lord, and in the front row are John Williams (missionary to the South Seas, martyred), Jeremiah Williams (circuit rider preacher to the land of Lincoln and Ohio in the late 1800s), Emily Williams (Jeremiah's wife of 7), Benjamin and Ruth Williams (my parents and active Evangelicals), Hope and Burton Winke (my Aunt and Uncle -- Hope and Ruth helped their mother found dozens of Christian Churches in central India during the early 20th century), Edith & Ross Willobee and their deceased child David (my mother and aunt's missionary parents to India 1907 ff - Ross and David are buried in India), Uncle Smith (the black missionary from Trinidad who immigrated to India was died there as an old preacher who taught me at his knee and shoulder to sing "Rolled Away, All my Sins are Rolled Away" in Hindi). And over the shoulders of these blood relatives are the saints of old, resting their hands on my ancestor's shoulders —altogether watching my every move. ..... My breath and voice of my many murmuring prayers are at the vertex or foci of the rotunda and my audience can hear everything I whisper like those acoustic museum displays. Indeed I am living in Hebrews 12:1.

Then, I notice that the saints (mine and the Biblical ones) are standing, if not hovering, over beautiful polished marble of various colors... and beneath me is compacted dirt. Over the saints is a tall and ornate roof to protect them, and over me the roof is missing, exposing my efforts to sun and wind, rain, and fog, hot and cold. Sometimes my flooring is mud, other times it is hard, but it is never grass. I am in the heavenly court, and I am on display as evidence...but of what kind? Am I evidence for the prosecution or the defense? That is my choice. What will I do?

Tonight, will I make a good examination of conscience and confession? Everyone watches and prays for me.

Smelly Shepherds

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:23:00 +0000

I'm bored with politics... at least blogging about the ancient social activity that is suppose to bring peace and goodwill to the common man, but for me only seems to bring distrust and angst. So, I'll try blogging my contemplations from time to time. I'm part of a new Oblates of Mary lay organization, under Fr. Dennis Brown. For the second time in our short Catholic life, Pam and I are going through the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius with him as our spiritual director. In short, the idea is to contemplate a Biblical scene, put yourself into it, and gain some spiritual fruit or lesson from imaginatively being there which you can apply today. So here goes.
======
THE SHEPHERDS

I'm one of the shepherds in a pasture outside of Bethlehem. We see angels in the sky trying to talk to us. We're scared and start to run not knowing what this is. When we figure it out (how we figure it out I'm not sure) we start to argue. (All good stories have conflict.) There are four of us. One of us is a skeptic and doesn't even darken the synagogues' door step. The other is all excited and starts jumping up and down quoting obscure passages from Scripture....he's nuts. The third is a dim wit and will follow the last person he talked to or fed him. And the fourth is wanting to go back and sleep off his drunken stupor. But when Mr. Faithfilled wants us all to go see this baby in the middle of the night, I think he's off his rocker... angels or not. I mean, in the daylight the villagers wouldn't let us in the gate without taking a bath.... it's been a week and we've been living with sheep. And then there's the problem of leaving the sheep in the middle of the night with only drunk and knocked out Rocky to watch them.... not a good idea. And what would you think if you looked out your house window in the middle of the night (I mean the men back then probably has enlarged prostates, too) and saw three suspicious guys wander into town that shouldn't be there? You'd call the cops, except there was no telephone, so you'd take your stick, rouse your neighbor, and case them out of town as if they were thieves.

So, going to see Jesus, isn't that easy, even if he was born a few hundred yards away. But, in the middle of the night.... wait, how do we know the baby is awake with his parents? This might be the first night they've gotten him to sleep on time, and they're bushed and fast asleep. Wouldn't we be waking them up? "Hey, Joseph wake up Mary so we can see the baby!" Watch out he's got a biggger stick.

So, I'm wanting to believe that we should go see Jesus and bug his parents, and raise the ire of the town folk, especially when the sheep we're suppose to be watching run off into the dark. I have my doubts, because I know that unless God does this, with me an unlikely, unworthy, smelly, otherwise-occupied, and sacred sinner -- it will not happen, and we will all be ridiculed by those that know us.

Now, what was that you saw in the sky? Naw, it was a dream, go back to sleep.

Mary Ann Glendon Says No To Notre Dame

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:14:00 +0000

April 27, 2009

The Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C.
President
University of Notre Dame

Dear Father Jenkins,

When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame’s most memorable commencement speeches. So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.

Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.

First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions “should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles” and that such persons “should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution’s freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.

Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:

President Obama won’t be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal.
We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about.

A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.
Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.

It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.

In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.

Yours Very Truly,
Mary Ann Glendon

Bruskewitz Makes It Clear - Notre Dame NOT Catholic

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:21:00 +0000

April 3, 2009

The Reverend John Jenkins, C.S.C
President, University of Notre Dame
400 Main Building
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Reverend and dear Father Jenkins,

Permit me to add my name as well to the long list of Bishops of the Catholic Church who are utterly appalled by your dedication to immorality and wrong-doing represented by your support for the obscenity called “The Vagina Monologues”, and your absolute indifference to the murderous abortion program and beliefs of this President of the united States.

The fact that you have some sort of past connection with the State of Nebraska makes it all the more painful that the Catholic people here have to see your betrayal of the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.

I can assure you of my prayers for your conversion, and for the conversion of your formerly Catholic University. I am

Sincerely yours in Christ Jesus,
The Most Reverend Fabian W. Bruskewitz
Bishop of Lincoln

My Aggrivation with Uninformed Anti-Catholics

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:33:00 +0000

Recently, TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network) aired one of our specials: "Common Ground". Although the airing was in the middle of the night (3:30 AM ET) we received approximately 100 direct orders, and our wholesalers also supplied perhaps another 100 units to customers. Almost universally we receive many compliments, astonishment and even a few tears from people who are thankful for this Kensington Church Production.

But occasionally we receive a dismissive letter (long and stuffed into a number 10 envelop) of how "completely wrong" Catholicism is. The infallible tenor of these letters is always amusing, as if the writer was part of the universe's creation. Universally, the letters (and ancillary material stuffed in with it) are textbook examples of three fallacies evident in 99% of all anti-Catholic literature. It's amazing that such writers, and even authors of such books can ignore such basic knowledge about reason, logic, and true Catholic teaching.

I try to ignore the letters, insofar as I often feel compelled to take these people seriously (and they are serious) and provide thorough responses. But experience has taught me that the writers are usually not interested in truth, but only venting their prejudice, and occupying my time from more worthwhile endeavors.

Over the Easter weekend, however, I took some time to respond to one lady, Phyllis (her real name), with the intention of posting it on my Catholic Articles page back on StanWilliams.com. Here's the link Letter to Phyllis.

My aggravation with the fallacies used by anti-Catholics is modestly evident in this response to a Nineveh's Crossing "customer" who requested a catalog. The letter begins with an explanation of the three major fallacies anti-Catholics use in their frail attempt o debunk Catholicism. It then goes on to explain the Bible to someone who told me to study my Bible more closely. This is also a person who claimed to have been raised in the Catholic Church, so some chastisement is necessary.

COOL AND CONNECTED: THE HIPNESS OF STEM CELLS, MONEY, AND POWER.

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:03:00 +0000

My friend and editor from Catholic Exchange.com responded to my PREVIOUS POST about Dr. Oz, Michael J. Fox, on Oprah. This is my response to her.

----

Mary, you are right when you suggest that embryonic stem cell research is connected to the hip with a thirst for power, and that such power dwarfs any concern for the lives of tiny humans. And while to some "players" the argument is not really all about "therapeutic good" -- that is the horse to which they've strapped their saddle. Thus, revealing their true motives (power and greed) may be a more productive strategy for pro-life researchers and pundits.

Let me explain.

There are two arguments in the embryonic stem cell debate that to the thinking Catholic are attached at the hip, but to those less insightful (and innocent in their ignorance) are separate issues. The first is the search for cures to protect adult life, the second is the protection of embryos, tiny human life. Yes, there is the obvious connection that to kill a life to protect another is evil. But to accept that argument you have to believe that embryos are indeed human life, and most people don't believe that because it is not common sense—that an embryo is human life is not a commonly observable phenomenon. Thus, embryos as human life becomes more an article of faith even with scientific evidence.

I get the sense that the former argument (the search for cures) is more important to one group (those of improperly formed faith), and the latter (protecting embryonic life) is more important to the other (those with properly formed faith). The ratio of importance to these two groups is so large that the other argument is lost in the shadows. And I believe that people like Oprah and Michael J. Fox are at heart not sinister killers of the innocent. In their ignorance they want what is good for the common person. I suggest that they would enjoy supporting life in all its forms as long as it does not seem to conflict with their understanding of life in the throes of battling deliberating diseases. Understand that the effects of Parkinson's Disease is far more a common sense thing than embryonic life. One is easily observable on national television, and the other is essentially invisible and not available to our common senses. Thus, I think the segment with Dr. Oz was a huge (although stealth) stake in the ground for the "hip" -- that is where the two arguments are connected.

The common terminology for that "hip" (which to us "moralists" is "cool" as well as "connected") is NATURAL LAW. No matter what any liberal, atheist, corrupt politician, or demonic figurehead does, they cannot beat natural law. In a big way USSR's dissolution resulted from the slow but real discovery of natural law. Obama can pontificate, and the liberal congress can legislate, and Tony (hypocrite) Blair can "Catholicgate" as much as they want, but in God's timing, (not mine, dang it) they will all come to kiss the feet and the feats of Natural Law. You can't beat it in the long run.

The embryonic stem cell debate occurs on these two levels—health and morality. Many of us yell and scream on the moral side, but the other side of the coin is the physical science of how man is still incapable of manipulating DNA and impersonating God in creating and growing life. When man does mess around with the moral side of things, he simultaneously messes around with physical science (as God knows it, not man's marginalized understanding). The result is cancer. (Pun intended for there is both a moral and a physical cancer, and Dr. Oz mentions the physical, but we "moralists" see that his mention is simply the metaphor for the moral. You cannot separate the psychological and spiritual dimension from the physical—as all good sacramental Christians should fully understand, as well as readers of my book, "The Moral Premise" -- an unabashed plug).

It is King David that proclaimed time and time again, "I love Your law O Lord. I study it all day long. Your command makes me wiser than my foes, for it is always with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers, because I ponder your decrees ...." (Ps 119:97 ff). When David says he studied God's laws "all day long" he is not referring to pouring over the text of the Mosaic Law, but rather to observing how Natural Law wins out in every case throughout his vast kingdom, especially in his own moral life. It is entirely possible that Nathan (David's prophet in residence) saw the guilt that riddled David after destroying Uriah & Bathsheba's marriage, and confronted David after hearing the roar of the palace rumor mills. Did Nathan hear from God directly? Possibly. But, 2 Samuel 12:1 says that "the Lord SENT Nathan to David". It doesn't say that the Lord had to explain to Nathan what was going on. Natural Law would have prompted a blanket of guilt upon David and the officials that assisted David in his immoral task. And Natural Law would have fostered the kingdom's rumor mill to the hilt (and most of it was probably not rumor). When it came time to write Psalm 51 and Psalm 119 there was plenty of evidence that you can't beat natural law, and in it we have ultimate faith that what is right will prevail.

Thus, Dr. Oz, with Oprah and M. J. Fox at his side, on national TV, is like Nathan popping his head up and saying, "You can't beat Natural Law." Submit you fools! (Except Oz is nice about it... he wants to be invited back to the Queen of daytime television. Which makes me wonder if Nathan came to the King of the daytime court, where all the world was watching and listening.)

BUSINESS vs. NON-PROFIT UNIVERSITIES

Getting back to the sinister debate. There is another force at work that I have never heard mentioned, but I suspect is actively driving the embryonic stem cell argument from a lack of salience or knowledge about the division in medical research groups. In the medical research profession there are at least two groups that could not be more different, yet may appear to have the same credentials. There are medical researchers who look to business models to fund their livelihoods. Their research creates a product (e.g. drugs and therapies) that meet needs, and then they sell their products for a profit. These are profit (not necessarily prophet) oriented companies that get their funding from business investors and enter the free market to make their money.

The second group of medical researchers look to a grant model to fund their livelihoods. Their first step is to create public awareness of a need (real or invented), and then ask the public, through government grants, to fund the research. If this group is successful, their work may result in patents and make the researchers and research institutions where they work, richer. These institutions are university research centers, who have far less money, less sophisticated apparatus, and an inferior infrastructure to support their research desires. The university researchers cannot generally go to the business community for funding unless the business investors see the likelihood of success and a return on their investment. In the case of embryonic stem cell research my guess is that investors are going to fund adult stem cell research because of the vast disparity in success between embryonic and adult stem cell prospects. There are over 70 successful therapies developed from adult stem cells, and utter failure, along with cancerous tumors, resulting from embryonic research.

But the university researches have the "benefit" of a monopoly on the embryonic public debate since no good business will come near it. And further we need to remember that the liberal politics of public universities are attached at the hip to state funding, and a public that is currently sensitized to liberal policies. Thus, liberal university medical researchers are having their moment in the lime-light. What they don't realize is that lime is dumped on corpses to stop the spread of contagious disease. Ah, well, it will take them time, but someday they'll realized that you can't beat natural law, even if it does take time for the cancer to spread a ways.

My instinct is that pro-life pundits should follow the money, and reveal the greed and thirst for power and prestige that university researchers are lusting after. Their celebrity status will be short lived, for sure, as Dr. Oz suggests when he says, "the stem cell debate is dead." But even in a short time lives will be lost, and public dollars squandered.

Dr. Oz made that point, discreetly with Fox and Oprah. So, let's follow the money and reveal the financial and prestige motives of embryonic stem cell researches, which I claim are closer to the surface and more exposed to common sense. Greedy researchers can hide behind their moral claims of improving life for the common good by finding cures of diseases, but they can't hide easily behind their bank accounts and the prestige that running a large state funded research facility offers.

Dr. Oz with Michael Fox and Oprah - Stem Cells

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:39:00 +0000

Finally, the liberal media and pundits hear from one of " their own" about the problem with embryonic stem cells and what the natural solution is. You can't fight Natural Law, and the sooner we embrace it, the sooner we'll cure diseases like Parkinson's. Click on image for clip from show.

Jenkins and Obama: Promotion of the Obscene

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:21:00 +0000

I've been praying for:

a) Unity of our bishops on publicly moral matters (by their silence on public issues they appear Protestant, e.g. of different or ambivalent minds).

b) Evidence that my hours of prayer have some effect...although no doubt joined with thousands of other prayers.

DEAR GOD: YOU NEED TO PROVE TO US THAT PRAYER REALLY DOES WORK.

----Thanks to Tony Ryan for sending this out------

March 31, 2009
Reverend John I. Jenkins, C.S.C.
President
University of Notre Dame
400 Main Building
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Dear President Jenkins:

I wish to express in my own name and on behalf of the Catholic community of this Diocese, my dismay and outrage at your decision to invite the current President of the United States to address the 2009 graduates of the University of Notre Dame and to receive an honorary degree.

This decision of your flies in the face of the expressed directive of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in the year 2004, that Catholic institutions not so honor those who profess opposition to the Church’s doctrine on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.

I would ask that you rescind this unfortunate decision and so avoid dishonoring the practicing Catholics of the United States, including those of this Diocese. Failing that, please have the decency to change the name of the University to something like, “The Fighting Irish College” or “Northwestern Indiana Humanist University.”

Though promotion of the obscene is not foreign to you, I would point out that it is truly obscene for you to take such decisions as you have done in a university named for our Blessed Lady, whom the Second Vatican Council called the Mother of the Church.

I sign myself

Very truly yours,

The Most Reverend Thomas Doran, D.D., J.C.D.
Bishop of Rockford

Other Vocies on the Terry-Burke Controversary

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 13:51:00 +0000

At CatholicCulture.org there's an editorial by Phil Lawler that criticizes Randall Terry, making judgments about Terry's motivations that are, well, inaccurate to put it nicely. You can read Phil's opinion HERE. There are no com boxes on their site, but below is what I wrote to Phil. Diane K. links to this on my com box on an earlier post.

Phil:

Your spin on the Randall Terry - Ap. Burke event has its roots in a Catholic Cultural "ideal" that (having come to Catholicism out of Evangelicalism) I see differently. Indeed Randall Terry is a different personality than Ap. Burke and most of our Catholic bishops. Please see my two blog posts (below) in response to this situation and Diane Korzeniewski's posts, who (I still love her) takes your position. I know Randall Terry personally, and while I've not been involved in his many activities over the years (although I've been invited) I will attest that he is not after any self-aggrandizement as you so indelicately put it. A more accurate representation regarding Randall's character is that of total selfishness for for cause of life and truth. He is not the kind of person to seek fame, although he does seek attention for the cause. He would rather be ridiculed and poverty stricken for the issues of life and truth--and he has been both. For Randall, his reputation can be torn apart if in the end the lives of babies are saved. And his life has been thus torn several times. Yet, like Jeremiah, he perseveres. As I point out in my posts, there is a fallacious carefulness on the part of American Catholic Culture that has marginalized the Catholic Church and made it ineffective. I explain how in these posts. Here are my responses, the second is perhaps more directly put, but both have examples of how God's men (Biblical and Saints) of old have acted more like Randall than like Ap. Burke.

http://crossingnineveh.blogspot.com/2009/03/archbishop-burke-chastises-randall.html

http://crossingnineveh.blogspot.com/2009/03/cardinal-george-archbishop-burke-at.html

Stanley D. Williams, Ph.D. (Stan)

(I advertise on your site, by the way, and get good response to my ads. Keep up the good work.)
http://www.CrossingNineveh.blogspot.com
http://www.NinevehsCrossing.com

Cardinal George and Archbishop Burke at the National Press Club

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:59:00 +0000

This is a response to Diane Korzeniewski's excellent post in response to mine of hers, etc. See her post Te Deum laudamus!: Continuing discussion on Catholic dissidence, Archbishop Burke and Randall Terry.

Likewise, this inning of our constructive dialogue on this most important topic, is too big for her com box. I'll put a link there to this.

Perhaps the encapsulation of this post can be stated as my title hints: Cardinal George AND Archbishop Burke need to appear at the National Press Conference, in person, and make statements, take questions, and do a little fire and brimstone preaching in the process. That of course is not their style, unfortunately. Because they didn't do that, Randall Terry did the next best thing. I'm sure Randall Terry would kiss their feet and back off, if they were to do what he, me and a host of others (I'm including the heavenly hosts in that reference) think they should do.

Let me give you some more examples of what I mean.

Did you see any of the March for Life video coverage this past January of the speeches? There was a juxtaposition that was very telling of my point that we need some on-fire preaching and public confrontation of this very public issue. Check out Rev. Luke Robinson's "talk." Trademark speech! Best Practice preaching! Watch it here and cry. He (a black evangelical Protestant) even begins with quotes from Mother Theresa. WE NEED CHANGE NOW MORE THAN EVER.

Moments after he was done (interrupted by frequent cheering of the crowd) a group of Catholic bishops took the podium and also spoke of their support for Life. It was so forgettable that I don't think it even made it to YouTube among the dozens of other videos posted there. If someone knows if it got posted, please let me know where it is. The juxtaposition with Robinson quoting Mother Theresa and the polite response of our bishops was telling of why Catholicism is not as effective in the public forum as it could be.

My call for some revival preaching, as opposed to polite dialogue, is hilariously exampled in Patrick Madrid's book "SEARCH AND RESCUE: How to Bring Your Family and Friends into or Back into the Catholic Church." Madrid's mantra is that of quiet persuasion, and the quote before his Table of Contents is the always present Catholic adage "Evangelize always. When necessary, use words." (St. Francis of Assisi).

What irritates me is that this quote is used (by many in Catholicism) as if it was Scripture. But, that quote is NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BIBLE. Yet you'll find quite the opposite attitude in the lives of both OT prophets and NT apostles. What if Jeremiah, Isaiah, or Moses were to have followed St. Francis' adage? DISASTER -- and probably no Old Testament. Let me remind you that Jeremiah was killed for getting in the face of kings and other church leaders. And there was another man, in the NT whose first name began with "J" who suffered the same consequence. Can you imagine Jesus following St. Francis' adage: "Hey, Jesus, Evangelize always, but only when necessary use words." PLEASE folks STOP using this idiotic adage. It has caused Catholics in this country to be silent NOT evangelize, and to NOT confront culture, and for bishops to NOT publicly challenge public officials on very public policy.

The second thing about Madrid's book that is contrary to his thesis is the title, and the drawing on the cover of a life ring being thrown to a guy in a small row boat supposedly overcome by big waves (not depicted). In water rescue situations "Search and Rescue" is NOT a quiet operation, there is, NECESSARILY a lot of yelling. Duh!

The third thing about Madrid's thesis (and the thesis of Catholics who think that reverence before the Blessed Sacrament is the proper attitude when confronting public evil) is Madrid's quoting of Pope Pius XI who wrote in admiration about another St. Francis. St. Francis de Sales was successful in converting a large segment of France formerly controlled by John Calvin. Ironically Madrid cites Pius XI evidence that contradicts Madrid's thesis. Here are two quotes (the first from Pius XI, the second from Madrid)... hardly the quiet or non-confrontational man this guy was (emphasis of Pius' words, quoted by Madrid, mine):

It is almost unbelievable with what vigor and constancy he defended the cause of Jesus Christ... If they fled him, he pursued, calling after them loudly... When during a sermon, almost the entire audience one after another left the Church, he would continue preaching. At no time did he ever lose his mental poise or his spirit of kindness toward these ungrateful hearers. It was by such means as these that he finally overcame the resistance of his most formidable adversaries. (Pius XI, Rerum omnium peturbationem, sec. 8, Madrid's SEARCH AND RESCUE, page 6-7.)

Early in the morning, before the townspeople got up, Francis slipped his tracts under the door of each home, Catholic and Protestant. He knew that if, free from peer pressure, the people would just read for themselves the biblical and historical case for the Catholic Church, they would be more likely to consider the Catholic message. And that's precisely what happened. (Ibid, pg 13)

Now, toning down my "rhetoric" let me respond more directly to Diane's last post:

For the most part I think we've done our part to generate some thought and discussion on this topic. In many respects we agree on substance. We're perhaps disagreeing on "degree" of how justice, correction, or tolerance and trust is played out in the public square. We both trust the Holy Spirit... although I'm not sure how any of us, without taking 120 years, know what the H.S. actually wants. Look how long it has taken bishops to decide certain beliefs. (I have a bone to pick with God about that one.)

My rebuttal for contemplation:

a. Throughout history popes, bishops and laymen have felt they were led by the H.S. to become militant when quiet dialogue (in the face of grave evil) was not making progress at saving civilization. The Civil War is an example, as is WWI and WWII. I have sensed we're on the cusp of another such time with the abortion issue.

b. I knew W. Edwards Deming. Did a documentary about him, interviewed him, read his books. Your citation of his comment about incremental change (as opposed to sweeping change) only works in situations where the output is being constantly evaluated for quality. (e.g. Statistical Processes, I know them well.) When there is no such systemic evaluation present, sweeping change (of the process) may be necessary. I posit that is the case with the American Catholic Church. See my essays on Best Practices of Faith Formation.

c. You can't compare the motivation of a homeless waif stealing bread for food with an educated prince of the Church living in comfort. Canon 915, as Ab. Burke points out, is easy to understand...perhaps even by the homeless waif who can't read. I discount, therefore, that we cannot judge a bishop's motivation for ignoring something so clear. We're not taking about confronting an ignorant lamb, sheep (or waif) here, but supposedly head shepherds who are educated and hand selected: "PROTECT THE LAMBS, FEED THE SHEEP" (c.f. John 21).

d. If we can't judge the motivation of a bishop, we are certainly not in a position to judge the motivation of Randall Terry. It's a matter of historic speculation, but I suspect that if there were 12 bishops in this country who had the fire in their belly Randall Terry demonstrates, ABORTION WOULD NOT BE LEGAL TODAY IN THIS COUNTRY. What if the Apostles (with Mathias, not Judas) had been around during the last 100 years? Do you think Margaret Sanger would have had a pulpit in the public forum? I think she would have been converted or chased off the public map by indignation of St. Paul's preaching. I'm looking at this with the perspective that unlike Protestant preachers like Billy Graham (as great as he was during that time) Billy did not have the apostolic (e.g. historic and infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit) that our bishops have, and have had, had they chosen to rise up and use it.

e. I challenge us all to think more carefully where the line is drawn between what is "charitable" speech and "tolerance of evil." I struggle all the time (after reading scandalous news reports on the web) whether or not to comment to the contrary in the article's com box. Most of the responders are illicit fools, and there needs to be more salt out there. My solution is for Catholic business men and women to buy up the newspapers and control the com boxes. Free Speech is a misnomer when people are led to destruction. And it's still against the law to yell (falsely) "FIRE!" in a crowded building or darkened theater. But is it just as illicit to not yell FIRE when there truly is one.

Archbishop Burke Says It Again - Are Other Bishops Listening?

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:09:00 +0000

On the Catholic Action for Faith and Family's site is an interview between Archbishop Burke and Thomas J. McKenna (March 10, 2009) mostly dealing with Obama's nomination of Governor Sebelius to serve as Secretary of Health and Human Services. The content is very similar to the one with Randall Terry, and reported to have occurred only 8 days later.

Again, clearly, Burke tells other bishops to fall in line. Will they get the message? And why was Randall Terry singled out for a finger waging? Here's my answer: Because some bishops don't like Randall Terry's tactics. They don't like to be told what to do, even when it's right and in accordance with Matt 18. That's it. But was the message the same? Absolutely. Which will create more buzz? Let me rephrase that, which will get noticed by the other bishops? Okay, which DID get to the other bishops? Answer: Randall Terry's. How do I know this? Because Ab. Burke hasn't yet written a letter to Catholic Action for Faith and Family chastising them. Looks to me like Randall is doing his job. I hope Ap. Burke speaks up all the more. I hope Ab. Burke sees the enemy here are the politicans (both elected and appointed, both U.S. Government and Papal.)

Here are excerpts, emphasis mine. Click the title above or HERE for the full interview.

Ab. Burke: It is sad for our nation to have a person who favors the right to kill the unborn in the womb placed in charge of the federal office with responsibility for health and human services… she should not be entrusted with the questions of health and human services for our nation.

As a Roman Catholic, her appointment is the source of the greatest embarrassment because she has publicly and repeatedly betrayed her Catholic faith…

What is more, she has obstinately remained in her moral error after being admonished by, at least, three of her Bishops, including her present Bishop, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas...

Archbishop Naumann proceeded in perfect accord with Canon Law and the sound pastoral practice it embodies. He steadfastly tried to help Governor Sebelius recognize her grave error and to correct herself. When she refused to do so, he had no choice but to remind her that the Church’s discipline requires that persons who publicly and obstinately remain in serious sin must be denied Holy Communion. When the Governor did not respect the Archbishop’s instruction that she not present herself to receive Holy Communion, he was obliged to make it public that the Governor had been instructed not to present herself to receive Holy Communion...

No Catholic who publicly and obstinately remains in serious sin can receive Holy Communion...

Every Bishop is held to the same universal Church discipline which has been in force since the time of Saint Paul the Apostle and is stated in canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law. Whether Governor Sebelius is in the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas, or in any other diocese, she should not present herself for Holy Communion because, after pastoral admonition, she obstinately persists in serious sin.

Archbishop Burke Chastises Randall Terry

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:53:00 +0000

My friend in the battle for truth, Diane M. Korzeniewski, posts on Te Deum laudamus! this morning (a great blog) her dismay over Randall Terry's (picture at right) manipulation of Archbishop Burke interview to criticize American bishops who do not abide by Canon 915.

My post about the original interview, also with YouTube embeded clips is HERE.

Her dismay comes even as Archbishop Burke issued a statement, also available on Diane's blog, about his dismay at being "used" by Randall Terry.

I say: The Holy Spirit used Randall Terry to get the bishops out of their comfort zone and into the fight, where they should have been all along. That it takes a country western rocker (Randall is very talented in that arena) and layman who has risked all to lead the fight should shame the bishops far more than what Ab. Burke is upset about. Good Grief! They should read Terry's HUMBLE PLEA (available at Nineveh's Crossing's home page for free). Until Ab. Burke has spent as many nights in jail as Mr. Terry in the ProLife battle, Ab. Burke should laugh it off and publicly admit he needs more experiences like this to learn a few things. His position does not make him infallible or above reproach.

Here's my comment on Diane's blog.

Consider this: What will it take for the bishops to grow some backbone? Do we hide the truth, and their cowardice to practice the teachings of Mother Church (e.g. Canon 915), or do we hide behind political correctness, politeness, and the false need to convey "nice" feelings when "guilt" is the virtue needed. I say CONGRATULATIONS to Mr. Terry. He's clever and wise, and yes he's manipulative in the cause of life and truth. I say BRAVO! Ab. Burke would do well to read Mr. Terry's HUMBLE PLEA in which Mr Terry suggests that they might be more ProLife if bishop's lives were being murdered instead of little, helpless babies. And finally, Mr. Terry's tactics are WELL known by ANYBODY involved in the ProLife movement. That Ab. Burke (an American who has been around all the time of Mr. Terry’s trials and tribulations and battles in the ProLife movement) would chastise Mr. Terry over this is clear evidence that Ab. Burke is naive of the struggle and those involved. Finally, let's not blame Mr. Terry for the typical incompleteness of the mainstream press. But then, just perhaps, the Holy Spirit knows what needs to be done. Shame on the bishops who don't follow Canon 915, and shame on Ab. Burke for putting their feelings and his political statue ahead of holiness.

Archbishop Burke Interviewed by Randall Terry

noreply@blogger.com (Stan Williams) — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 04:33:00 +0000

(Pewsitter.com)March 25, 2009 - Washington, DC - Following is the transcript of Randall Terry’s interview with His Excellency, Archbishop Burke, Prefect, Apostolic Signatura on March 2, regarding Canon 915 and the withholding of communion from Catholic politicians that support abortion. The actual video footage of this interview was shown earlier today at a press conference at the National Press Club, in Washington DC. More information can be found at www.humbleplea.com. (Free copies of Humble Plea are available at Nineveh's Crossing's home page.

Here are the YouTube videos, the transcript follows:

Mr. Randall Terry: Your Excellency, it’s a delight to be with you. Thank you so much.

Archbishop Raymond Burke: Pleased to have you come, and to visit with you.

Mr. Terry: For the umpteenth time, I and the others are asking, under Canon 915 what should or should not be done?

Archbishop Burke: The Canon is completely clear, it is not subject in my judgment to any other interpretations. When someone is publicly and obstinately in grave sin we may not administer Holy Communion to the person. And that, basically, for two reasons: number one, to prevent the person himself or herself from committing a sacrilege, and secondly, to protect the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist. In other words, to approach, to receive our Lord in Holy Communion, when one insists on remaining in grave sin, is such a violation of the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist, so that Communion must not be given to people who are publicly, obstinately, in grave sin.

Mr. Terry: And so does that apply to politicians of any party that are saying: "Yes, it’s okay to abort children" –to kill children?

Archbishop Burke: Yes, for someone who in any way contributes in an active way to the murder of innocent defenseless infants in the womb—children in the womb—from the very inception of human life, this is the greatest of sins. And such a person, until he or she has reformed his or her life, should not approach to receive Holy Communion.

Mr. Terry: And if they do approach, the person who is administering Holy Communion should say, “No.”?

Archbishop Burke: Right. In fact, the Canon puts the burden upon the minister of Holy Communion whether it’s the ordinary minister which would be a bishop, a priest, a deacon—or an extraordinary minister—it doesn’t make any difference. It says they’re not to be admitted to receive Holy Communion. Normally speaking, in my experience, when I have spoken with, for instance, Catholic politicians who have insisted on supporting pro-abortion legislation and told them they should not approach any more to receive Holy Communion, in my experience they don’t. Now, where Bishops have not applied the Canon, often times it’s said that this will cause some kind of disorder at the time of distribution of Holy Communion. That’s not verified. It’s not using Holy Communion to make a statement at all, it’s simply respecting this most sacred gift we have - namely, the Body and Blood of Christ—which can only be received when one has repented of his sins. And I would also make the point—and I believe that it is true that on the contrary - those public figures—Catholics—who are consistently promoting pro-abortion legislation and policies—use reception of Holy Communion to try to justify what they are doing; in other words, to present themselves as devout Catholics, when in fact they are sinning against the most fundamental teaching of the moral law. [Thou shall not murder.]

Mr. Terry: When the election was approaching, Bishop Martino said he would not serve Communion to Vice Presidential Candidate Joe Biden. There were a handful of other bishops who made similar statements, for which the laity and the faithful were rejoicing.

But the deafening silence from so many other Bishops—and also the bishops who stepped up such as in Washington D.C., Virginia, others …Massachusetts…[and] said that we will serve communion—was so painful for us. What word of encouragement would you give, first to the laity on our struggle to bring orthodoxy back, and then to your brother bishops and priests?

Archbishop Burke: I think simply to say: reflect upon this norm of the Church’s discipline—Canon 915—which is one of the most important canons to safeguard the greatest treasure that we have in this life, namely, the communion that we have with our Lord Jesus Christ, and His true body and His true blood; and to, in every way work so that also public witness is given to the sacredness of the Holy Eucharist. And so I would encourage the faithful when they are scandalized by the giving of Holy Communion to persons are publicly and obstinately in sin, that they go to their pastors, whether it’s their parish priest or to their bishop, to insist that this scandal stop. Because, it is weakening the faith of everyone. It’s giving the impression that it must be morally correct to support procured abortion, in at least in some circumstances, if not also generally. So they need to insist that their parish priest and the bishops, and for the rest…to my brother bishops and brother priests…simply to say: the service of the Church in the world today has to begin first and foremost with the protection of the life of those who are the most defenseless and the most innocent, namely the unborn, and certainly has to extend also to those who are gravely ill, or burdened with serious illness, who have special needs; and also now more and more their lives are being threatened by a culture of death which sadly has infected our nation. So I would just urge my brother bishops and my brother priests to see as the most fundamental witness and service which they can give in leading also the faithful in their pastoral care is the apostolate of the respect for human life.

Mr. Terry: The election of Obama sent shock waves around the world concerning the right to life of babies because of his commitment to pursue FOCA, to try to force hospitals - Catholic hospitals - into giving the morning after pill, other things – [the repeal of the] Mexico City policy. From your vantage point here in the Vatican, what kind of fruit around the world is this poison that’s percolating in America producing?

Archbishop Burke: There is no question, and I certainly see it here, living now here in Europe, and Italy, and also with the kind of communication within all of Europe that Barack Obama—President Obama—is a charismatic figure. And there was a great deal of—especially through the media—a great deal of publicity and so forth regarding the “hope,” the word that he used so much, that he offered—not only for the United States— and for the world. And so you can be certain that the whole world, and especially the English speaking world—which let us recall, is a great part of the world—is following very carefully and attentively what this man is doing—this world leader—which he is. And therefore, it becomes more incumbent upon us then ever, also in our responsibility for the scandal and the harm being done, not only in our own nation which is in itself— which we think about 50 million since the Roe v. Wade decision, 50 million unborn infants murdered—but also to consider the effect that our nation is having on the whole world in this culture of death.

America has the call to lead—to use its influence in the way that will give glory to God and will serve the common good in its most essential element: and that is by turning around this culture of death, and especially protecting the right to life of the unborn. So our responsibility is even greater than just for our own nation - which is in itself such a weighty matter. But we have to see how this is also having, adding a tremendous influence in the English speaking world, but also in the whole world, because of the charismatic nature of our present President. But in any case, no matter who is the President of the United States, here is a world leader with a tremendous capacity to promote the common good, but at the same time sadly, who could—by promoting and implementing anti-life legislation measures—could be an agent of death.

Mr. Terry: If I was a Catholic in another country, I would be watching the news unfold in America hearing the silence of so many Catholics, the debate over communion, and it might have the effect of me just saying, “Well, we have abortion here, they’ve got it there, let’s just all learn to live with it and go on about our business.”

Archbishop Burke: Well, I think this is precisely the effect that it has had. The communications today are instantaneous. The whole world knows that a very high percentage of Catholics in fact voted for this very anti-life candidate and so they watch this very carefully, and what the world needs to see now is a strong witness on the part of all Catholics and we can’t be content with the fact that some 55% - or whatever it is - who for whatever reason, supported this anti-life program. They have to see now that Catholics in the United States are alive and faithful and that they are going to work to protect human life, and above all, to let the President of the United States know that this is the number one issue.

Mr. Terry: There are many Catholics who believed that to vote for Obama - knowing his promises to extend child-killing even further - that to knowingly vote for him under those circumstances was a type of cooperation with moral evil. It was cooperating with evil. Do you concur with that and if so, why?

Archbishop Burke: Well, the fact of the matter is, it is a form of cooperation, because by voting we put a person in office. And people say, “What does my vote matter?” Well, your vote is either a vote to put someone in office who will do what is right and just, or someone who won’t. And so if you, knowing that abortion is a grave crime against human life – is the killing of an innocent, defenseless human life - and you vote for the candidate who says that he intends to make that more available – that practice of infanticide - you bear a responsibility. That is, you have cooperated in the election of this person into office, there’s no question about it.

Mr. Terry: Archbishop, thank you for your time. Do you have any closing comments or exhortations?

Archbishop Burke: President Obama uses this word “hope” in a way that for us is very disturbing. We need to have hope, the hope that is founded in Jesus Christ, alive for us in the Church; Jesus Christ who gave His life for everyone without exception, and with a particular love for the suffering and for those who are the most defenseless. And so we have to be filled with hope and give ourselves more than ever to His work, to His mission of protecting human life, and so I ask God to bless you very much in what you are doing to advance the cause of life.

Mr. Terry: Thank you, Your Excellency; long life to you.